Why Believe? By John Cottingham. Pp. xv, 186, London and New York: Continuum, 2009, $22.95, and Faith and Its Critics: A Conversation. By David Ferguson. Pp. 195, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2009, $35.00.
Why religious people believe in something that they cannot empirically identify has been a recurring question throughout the millennia. At all times, seemingly, throughout history there have been those who seek to undermine the people who believe, as well as the beliefs that they adhere unto. The contemporary era is no different. While offering distinct arguments in the following two titles that we will review, the authors share the same goal, seemingly: religious belief is widespread and warranted, and believers need to at least constructively – and patiently – dialogue with their critiques. It should be noted at the onset that neither title is constructed as an apologetic, nor are they to be read as such. Having said this, lets move on to a concise review of each title.
John Cottingham is the Chair of Philosophy at the University of Reading, UK (interestingly, this is Anthony Flew’s former position). He intends to write for believers and non-believers in this text, and exhibits a good grasp of the issues from both sides of the proverbial spectrum. Written in a clear and accessible style, in seven chapters Cottingham seeks to establish the nature of belief and the benefits of it, as well as the reasonableness of belief. Moreover, he addresses the perennial problems associated with belief in an unknown entity, and in so doing directly confronts Humean critiques, the problem(s) of transcendence, and the concept of revelation. Further, Cottingham discusses issues related to meaning applied to belief(s), particularly with respect to the concealment and accessibility of truths. In the final two chapters, Cottingham addresses issues that recur in the living-out of faith, including the notion of souls and the after-life, providence and suffering, and hope for the future.
While acknowledging the occasional dissonance to religious belief, Cottingham contends that religious belief is widespread – in part – because it is proverbially inborn within humanity; notably, however, he also avers that belief can be held unto while remaining rational and being true to our inner experience (cf. 20-21). In the fine third chapter, Cottingham somewhat belies Hume’s radical empiricist argument regarding the un-knowability of God – if there in fact be one. Fittingly, he responds that to believe in an unknown and unknowable God is essentially equivalent to believing in no ‘God’ at all (55). Regarding the general category of supernatural intervention – and the more specific doctrine of the resurrection of Jesus – Cottingham asserts that modern science cannot rule-out the possibility of breaks within the natural order (a position with which this reviewer disagrees; cf. 79-84). Interestingly, he posits – with reference to the problem of evil/suffering – that religious belief does not attempt to offer a solution to such things, but instead proffers resolve to forever follow the path of love (151). In sum, this title offers an enlivening perspective on the conflict between secularism and spirituality.
Our second book to be reviewed comes at faith from a different angle: the ‘New Atheism’, and is comprised of the 2008 Gifford Lectures at the University of Glasgow. While written by a former parish minister with degrees in both philosophy and theology, the topic of this title regards the likes of Richard Dawkins and Daniel Dennett (both are located at Oxford), as well as Christopher Hitchens and Sam Harris (who are both located in the USA). Indeed, David Fergusson, Professor of Divinity at the University of Edinburgh. Fergusson explains the work of these New Atheists in detail, noting that almost across the board, they consider religion not just illogical, but downright pathological (9). He largely contends throughout the book that a middle ground-type of conversation needs to take place between the contentions of skepticism and faith, whereupon each side recognizes they have something to learn from the other.
In a span of six chapters, Fergusson covers the historic rise of atheism, the credibility of religious belief, the nature and extent of Darwinian influence upon this New Atheism, the connection between morality and religion, terrorism, and sacred texts. Interestingly, he notes that whereas western atheism has been marked by a reactive, yet self-confident demeanour in times past, this New Atheism is more incredulous, intemperate, and dismissive than its forebears (30-31). Further, Fergusson contends that there are no real ‘new’ arguments within the New Atheism, but a mere reiteration and reinforcing of former claims (34). In commenting upon the Darwinian influence upon the New Atheism, he notes that they have not shown that ‘God’ is a consequence of evolution of matter, or a consequence or a Darwinian ‘misfiring’ (87). In sum regarding the latter book, one would might become well-armed to offer a cogent response to the arguments and criticisms of the New Atheistic agenda.
Both of these titles express the essential truth that despite centuries of skepticism and critical attack – which has been heightened in recent years – religious belief/faith persists among the laity and the ordained, as well as philosophers and scientists. And it doesn’t appear to be going anywhere.
Bradford McCall
Regent University, Virginia Beach, VA